That's too recent. Even if Germany won, there were enough people to interview, and enough written accounts to tell a mostly complete story of World War 2.
I'm talking more about ancient history. I'm talking about historians (Roman, Greek, etc...)
That usually commented on things that happened hundreds of years before.
As much as I love it, history is more assumption, conjecture, and embellishment, than actual fact.
The official narrative of the holocaust rests on very weak evidence. There is no evidence for the 6 million number (which is some sort of jewish religious prophecy they invoked much earlier even in WW1 for jews killed in eastern europe), and the evidence points to the camps themselves being work camps, not death camps. Indeed all of the western-liberated camps were claimed to be death camps yet they were found not to be. It was only the camps liberated by the jewish bolsheviks where these half-truths persisted until they were slowly debunked, the lies about bars of soap, lampshades, and other elaborate jewish victim fantasies.
What is most disgusting about the holocaust is that it seems to be used by revisionists as a cover to prevent questioning of the genocide of eastern europeans by Bolsheviks. Go into any history subreddit and ask questions about the role of jews in the holodomor and see how long before you are banned.
